2007

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 18.0497 Friday, 3 August 2007
[1] From: Larry Weiss <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Thursday, 02 Aug 2007 01:54:52 -0400
Subj: Re: SHK 18.0492 Shakespeare Golden Ear Test
[2] From: Ward Elliott <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Thursday, 02 Aug 2007 13:31:32 -0700
Subj: RE: SHK 18.0492 Shakespeare Golden Ear Test
[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Larry Weiss <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Thursday, 02 Aug 2007 01:54:52 -0400
Subject: 18.0492 Shakespeare Golden Ear Test
Comment: Re: SHK 18.0492 Shakespeare Golden Ear Test
I confess that I was the unidentified amateur who scored a golden ear.
When can I expect to receive my trophy?
As a high scorer I feel it is not out of place for me to object to at
least one of the questions (which would not have changed my
classification): The survey includes an obvious passage from "Shall I
Die?" (the opening two stanzas as I recall). I would have thought that
almost everyone must have recognized this passage since the title is
repeated twice in the first line. Therefore, the respondents who
recognized the poem were faced not with the question of whether the
style is "Shakespearean" -- I don't think it is, but some respected
professionals differ -- but, rather, the more academic question of
whether to follow the attribution by Gary Taylor and the Oxford editors
or the rejection by Elliott-Valenza. Since the latter scored the test,
it is not surprising that the "right answer" is "not Shakespeare."
However, Ward's report surprisingly indicates that fewer than a third of
the total respondents and only about half the rated participants
recognized the passage. Interestingly, those that did not recognize the
passage were most likely to get the answer "right," which I think proves
my point as the wrong answers by knowledgeable respondents were
undoubtedly influenced by the Oxford attribution. I respectfully submit
that future tests not include passages of disputed authorship such as
those treated in part VIII of Ward's post (the Funeral Elegy no longer
falls within that category, so its inclusion in the test was
reasonable), unless they are dummy controls not used to score "success."
I know that recognized passages are thrown out in deriving the more
"interesting" (statistically valid?) net scores, but some inferences are
drawn from gross scores as well, so I don't think it is reasonable to
include legitimately disputed attributions to test the sensitivity of a
respondent's ear. A person who recognizes a passage from a work of
disputed authorship is responding to extraneous considerations not
intended to be tested. Even where the respondents don't recognize a
disputed passage, its inclusion skews the results, as the "correct
answer" depends on the biases of the scorer.
Another issue of statistical reliability -- one that cannot so easily be
factored out -- is the problem of partial recognition. In many
instances it was relatively easy for me to place a passage in the
context of its play, even though the speech itself was not familiar, and
identify it as Shakespearean or not without reference to its style. On
the other hand, this can also be a trap. For example, the passage from
Sir John Oldcastle struck me as possibly from the last act of MW/W, a
play which I have not read for many years, as I thought it might have
referred to the Herne the Hunter episode. Ward indicates that he
believes the passage evokes "a beleaguered stag scene from As You Like
It"; but the point is the same.
Ward notes in his analysis that the validity of the test could be
compromised by test takers so intent on getting a high score that they
"comb [the passages for] stylometric tell-tales [such as] hendiadys";
but in some cases a lot of meticulous combing is not needed. I recall
one passage on the test which I did not recognize but which had a
distinctive Shakespearean-style hendiadys. That seemed a dead
give-away, so much so that I questioned whether it might have been
included as a red herring and, therefore, I had to think twice before
identifying the passage as Shakespearean. But is this really a problem?
Isn't the quick recognition of stylistic quirks the very thing the
test is supposed to quantify?
Finally, I am a little surprised that so few respondents recognized the
passage from Love's Labour's Lost; it contains my personal motto:
Small have continual plodders ever won,
Save base authority from others' books.
I look forward to Round 2, but with more than a soupcon of trepidation.
[2]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ward Elliott <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Thursday, 02 Aug 2007 13:31:32 -0700
Subject: 18.0492 Shakespeare Golden Ear Test
Comment: RE: SHK 18.0492 Shakespeare Golden Ear Test
Here's a shorter update than my last. I just looked at my Golden Ear
inbox and found six more rated, self-identified players who took the
test after deadline. One of them maxed the test while recognizing only
one passage! Maybe there is some hope for intuition after all. I've
added them all to my Round 2 invitation list.
Yours,
Ward Elliott
_______________________________________________________________
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net>
DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the
opinions expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the
editor assumes no responsibility for them.